Association of Engineers (Works & Housing) Nagaland, (AOEN) has appealed to the chief secretary for re-amendment of what it termed as “anomalies” in the Service Rule stating that there have been many instances where the provision of the Service Rule has been violated in terms of recruitment, out of turn promotion and illegal cadre management. AOEN president, Er. Khupi Natso said the Association could no longer remain silent spectators as even after the court of law upheld the prayer of the Direct Recruit Engineers Association Nagaland (works & Housing) (DREAN) against such violation on numerous occasions, things remained “futile.” It said that those who were given undue promotion continued to enjoy the same status and those who were victimized continued to remain so, since the case dragged on from one court to the other. The AOEN said such anomalies happening in an “unprecedented scale” was highly demoralizing and violation of fundamental right. “The service rule framed is meant to be followed in Ditto,” it said and added that the Service Rule, which in itself was a Statutory Rule cannot be substituted. The Association requested the chief secretary to intervene on several points so that the end of justice was met:AOEN said that an employee appointed in contravention of the laid down Service Rule framed under the provision of Article 309 of the Constitution of India, enjoyed the same as mentioned. It, however, said that the authority through an RTI reply to the DREAN had justified that all the officers regularized/absorbed in the rank of SDO through Cabinet approval was placed among the SDOs of direct recruit who were appointed through NPSC, after following all formalities. The AOEN said existence of any other formalities other than the Nagaland Engineering Service Rule, for recruitment and promotion was never heard of and if at all it existed, was in violation of the constitution of India as no Government order, notification or circular could be substituted for the statutory rules framed under the authority of law. It said that an employee appointed in contravention of the rule cannot be said to belong to the same stream vis-à-vis those who are appointed according to the rule, hence they cannot claim seniority over those regular appointee. (Annexure -2 ). The AOEN also said there was an instance where the unsuccessful candidate was made senior to the successful candidates who have appeared in the same competitive examination. It said that the action of the authority was undermining the merit of the highest recruitment agency of the State, which was not sustainable in the eye of the law. It was pointed out that the present ratio of the Direct Recruit:Promotee was 30.88%:56.37%, when the Service rule mentioned 60%:40%, when there were more than 200 unemployed Graduate Civil Engineers.Alleging random promotion to the post of SDO by the authority without following the service rule, the Engineers said this had led to the present scenario, where the direct recruit SDOs have come down to a mere 63 incumbent instead of 122, where as those promoted from lower grade rose to 115, which should have been only 82. The AOEN said such promotion had created a “great imbalance” in the cadre, as well as created lot of unemployment problem. The Engineers also said that the authority was clubbing the cadre on the basis of qualification, when it should be done on the basis of entry point to the service as mentioned in the service rule. It said there was no provision in any service rule where an employee with higher qualification was merged with the cadre from different entry point. The AOEN said this amounted to negating the accepted service jurisprudence.AOEN said that the DREAN had objected the seniority list of Sub Division Officer (Direct recruit) issued by the Joint secretary to the government of Nagaland on the ground that it was published violating all established norms. It said no opportunity was given inviting claims and objection, and that it was not known whether draft seniority was published prior to the publication of the list. AOEN said the list was “never published.”Stating that the authority was treating the same list as final, the Engineers wondered as to how such a big department could be run without having a seniority list. It also asked why the authority was finding it impossible to manage just 2 cadre i.e. Class –I direct recruit and Class – II direct recruit, as per the service rule, comprising of about 292 employees and 650-700 employee respectively.“Such an act of the Authority is most arbitrary, illegal and de hors the rules and is a clear case of nepotism, favoritism and a clear case of violation of the principal of natural justice. It is very unfortunate to see such act of unethical and unlawful method of governance in an unprecedented scale,” AOEN said.Charter of demands In the light of the above facts, the Association placed its charter of demands and to deliver justice within a period of 30 days:AOEN demanded that all appointees made in contravention of the Nagaland Engineering Service Rule be declared as Ex- Cadre/CO-TERMINUS since they were neither recruited directly by the commission nor they were promoted from the lower rank. Besides demanding immediate demotion of all such employees who have been given undue promotion to any higher rank, the AOEN demanded restoration of 75% : 25% ration in the post of Executive Engineer as per the provision of the service rule thereafter, before normal promotion matter was taken up.The Engineers said no further promotion from lower rank to the post of SDO/Asst. Engineer should be made till the ratio of 60% : 40% was achieved. It also said no deputation should be made to any post as there was no provision.The AOEN demanded that cadre of an employee should be reckoned from the entry point irrespective of the qualification he/she possess/may possess in service.It demanded publication of Draft Seniority list of employees within a month inviting for claims and objections, and the same be finalized within two months. It said the same should be updated and notified annually.The AOEN affirmed that it would not be a silent spectator of “all the unlawful, arbitrary and illegal action” of the competent authority and that it would leave no stone unturned in seeking justice in any form or method deemed fit, for which the Association said it should not be held responsible.